ciberido:Slam Dunkz: Sam responded to a lot of this hogwash on his site. Give it a read if you want to cut through the he-said-she-said and really see how disingenuous some of these reporters are.

Well, Harris is well spoken and makes a few good points, I'll give him that much. I still disagree vehemently with much of what he said in the article you linked to, but thank you for the link. Better to disagree with what he says himself than say I disagree based on what someone else said he said.

Harris does have his flaws, but then so does everyone. There is not a single person I have ever met with whom I agree about everything.

The trick is taking a critical eye to anything anyone presents to you. Then you make your own judgements.

ciberido:It's intellectual dishonesty and deliberate confusion to push your agenda, and will therefore cause people (at least one, anyway) to lose some respect for you, but do what you have to do.

My original suggestion indicated that the unwillingness to use this definition where it fits is quite common.

How that is intellectually dishonest you may need to explain to me. I'm not trying to trick anyone into anything but recognizing what science already does. Some people put a level of religious fervor into that which is not colloquially recognized as religious activity. But that term "religious activity" is telling. Religion is practice, not just observance.

If you put religious fervor (use the same parts of the brain) into sports fandom as some put into church participation, and often times much much more, how is that not religion?

If your answer is because that word doesn't apply, you are wrong.If it is because you don't like it and it confuses you, maybe you shouldn't engage.

Agent Smiths Laugh:Besides which, your steps do nothing to refute the point of his statement. A serial rapist murderer could follow your steps (earnestly, "with all his heart", since that seems to be some important measurement) and still be forgiven of all his crimes (or sins as some call them) and earn an eternal paradise. While his victim, who for the sake of argument never accepted Jesus (or followed any of your steps), burns in eternal agony for unbelief.

Deeds do not make someone worthy to enter the kingdom of God as is quite clear in the Bible.

So the murder-rapist not only ultimately gets away with his crimes, but is actively forgiven for all of them and rewarded with eternal bliss, while his victim (whose last moments were of violation, humiliation, pain, and terror) remains unforgiven, and dies only to be punished with eternal violation, humiliation, pain, and terror.

yup, you can view it that way - see my response to the first issue.

How very just and fair of your god.

I know you meant that sarcastically, however, what makes you (a human who is imperfect) believe that you are qualified to judge God (who is perfect - according to the Bible)? [serious question]

But you might argue, "They had a chance for the same forgiveness!" Sure. Sure they did. Right up until they were raped and murdered by your happy new cherub.

Nope, I wouldn't.

Also, as an aside, so who's correct? The denominations that think water baptism is necessary or the ones who don't? What about the multitudes of other denominations that think steps are added or removed from your list? Are they right? What about other religions, are they right?

In order to understand who is correct in any religion (Christianity included), one must find the examples laid forth by the religion's primary prophet/messiah/etc... In other words, was Jesus baptized (in water), or not, etc.

liam76:For the person it happens to, yeah. For judging the society? No.

One is the act of a handful and the other is supported by most people.

A bit odd to suggest that some part off a fundamentally undemocratic regime is something that's "supported by most people". It's not as though the people in Iran or the various Gulf countries had elections in which they decided to put these laws in place. The only meaningful metric, as far as I can see, is the actual consequences faced by real people in those societies.

To that end, let's say you had one society where a certain thing was officially punishable by death, and another in which the thing was "merely" punishable by prison time. And let's say further that the latter country had lynchings and murders that were as numerous (or more) as the people being killed in the former country (counting both executions and vigilante action), along with evidence that large parts of the state apparatus encourage or at least condone this kind of action. I wouldn't have any trouble saying that these two countries were "on par" with each other in terms of what's happening there in the names of their respective religions.

Keizer_Ghidorah:Religion prevents people from cynically sitting back and making fun of anyone who has a different idea? God told his followers to go out and either convert or kill those tho refused to convert.

Yes!!!Religion tempers people to listen to others.Here's some quotes from a book you only seem to know the parts that you disagree with:

James 1:19 Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger;Proverbs 19:27 Cease to hear instruction, my son, and you will stray from the words of knowledge.Proverbs 12:15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but a wise man listens to advice.Proverbs 18:13 If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame.Proverbs 11:14 Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety.Proverbs 10:19 When words are many, transgression is not lacking, but whoever restrains his lips is prudent.

Near as I can tell, just about anything that makes mankind believe that the sun doesn't shine out of their ass has been useful. We can't give people power over a f*cking dry cleaner store without them getting delusions if grandeur. Societal management? Pfft.

Near as I can tell, just about anything that makes mankind believe that the sun doesn't shine out of their ass has been useful. We can't give people power over a f*cking dry cleaner store without them getting delusions if grandeur. Societal management? Pfft.

Hell yeah... look at North Korea, they invented a religion around their great leader where before they had none.By invented, I mean, forced down their throat in a military dictatorship.The power of personal ego... to invent a religion where you are at the center.

NostroZ:Agent Smiths Laugh: I'd argue that every believer is ultimately only serving their own ego in a number of ways. Sense of hope, Sense of superiority. Sense of belonging. Sense of purpose. Sense of destiny. Sense of love. So forth.

I'd argue that there is no actual altruism devoid of selfishness. The ego, the self, seeks gratification and preservation in all things.

Yet, what you're saying is that the ACTIONS are good... the motivation might be selfish, but the result of serving the community is real.

Therefore, the proof is in the pudding.

It does not matter if the religious congregation is fueled by purpose, belonging, destiny, love, etc.What matters is that they are improving the community!

Hence, religion is a positive force upon humanity.

And also a negative force, just like any other human ideology (as is historically and contemporaneously) demonstrable. Any human motivation or action can be used for good or harm.

We never, ever, move beyond human responsibility for its actions.

No amount of good or evil done by any religion ever proves, empirically, its claims of god, satan, and all the trappings that come with them. And with that, the claim that there is an objective morality that is the final arbiter of human action goes right out the window.

In regards to human actions, the only thing we can demonstrate empirically is human action.

But when faced with that, do we even need gods to judge and/or guide our actions? Name one perceptible act of good or evil that a human being can accomplish that can not be accomplished without the divine.

s2s2s2:Then you are in luck. That post wasn't breaking anything to me, nor relevant to an applicable definition of a word, found in a dictionary.

These semantic parlor tricks are only good for cheap jokes and riddles. Doing this in a serious discussion, as ciberido pointed out, will accomplish nothing other than annoying the people talking to you.

Biological Ali:liam76: For the person it happens to, yeah. For judging the society? No.

One is the act of a handful and the other is supported by most people.

A bit odd to suggest that some part off a fundamentally undemocratic regime is something that's "supported by most people". It's not as though the people in Iran or the various Gulf countries had elections in which they decided to put these laws in place.

If I was saying "every part" that would be odd. Death penalty for gay peopel isn't a copntraversial topic in the muslim world.

Even in 1st world countries dislike for gays is widespread among muslims.

Biological Ali:To that end, let's say you had one society where a certain thing was officially punishable by death, and another in which the thing was "merely" punishable by prison time. And let's say further that the latter country had lynchings and murders that were as numerous (or more) as the people being killed in the former country (counting both executions and vigilante action), along with evidence that large parts of the state apparatus encourage or at least condone this kind of action. I wouldn't have any trouble saying that these two countries were "on par" with each other in terms of what's happening there in the names of their respective religions

What two countries are we talking about? There are numerous Muslim countries where the penalty is death, and there are numerous countries where you will get jail time and can be lynched for being gay. You are pointing to one christian country that contemplated a law including death penalty and saying they (all non western christiand countries) are on par.

NostroZ:Biological Ali: why it's laughed at by those who have even a cursory familiarity with logic - including many theists).

You can laugh at me all you want.

You can pretend that I'm a troll or whatever makes you happy to 'write off the argument as silly'.

Yet, the choice is clear. Do I believe in God? Yes or No?What is the consequence of yes - What is the consequence of no.

This is Pascal's Argument... There is no getting around it.Call me whatever you want all day (abusive ad hominem Mr. Logic man), this is a real choice for real people...Belief cannot be PROVEN true or false, hence logic only goes so far.

The human brain has two hemisphere's... One is logic, the other is intuition.You're here arguing that based on ONE HEMISPHERE's function you are 100% right, but we have TWO.Logic is not the end-all-be-all for the human species. Not functionally. Not biologically.

The problem with Pascal's is a pretty simple one. God is who ever people tell you God is, and that depends entirely on when and where you are born, so it's no more than a roulette game. Pick the wrong God and does as he tells you, even if it means killing other humans living under different God, and you might be actively working against the true God and ensuring a place in hell.

While if you choose to reject God, religion, and the people that prop up these things and do good, not for some treat at the end of fear of punishment, but because you actively think about what good is and try live a good life and make the world a little better for the people you'll someday leave behind, then I ask for what reason would a truly good god punish you for?

Would he not do the good thing and forgive you for not believing in him or any other God, and doing your utmost to live a good and moral life even though you did not believe you would receive a reward at the end? Or would his ego and pride be so hurt by your unbelief that he would do the truly evil thing, and cast you into eternal pain and suffering along with billions of good people that happen to land on the wrong spot on the religious roulette wheel? And if that God is evil enough to do that, why you want to serve him? Just because you are an ant before another being doesn't mean you should be an obedient ant and serve him by bringing suffering to others, even if he does hold the power of pain or comfort over you, like a dictator, king or, pope.

s2s2s2:liam76: Only if you live in a world where "religious fervor" is all it takes to have religion.

We don't live in that world.

By democratic vote. Yes, I've noticed. The world seems to be a very confused place. All we need to do is agree on everything, regardless of what that is, and we won't have any more trouble.

I wasn't suggesting that we do call these things religion. I'm saying it doesn't really mean anything that we don't.

When someon does or even brings it up they are clearly trying to distance themselves from the conversation at hand and play semantic tricks. So yes it does matter that we don't because it lets us know who not to waste tiem with when they do.

Biological Ali:will accomplish nothing other than annoying the people talking to you.

Everyone annoys, sometimes. Again, I'm not trying to trick you into believing we mean the same thing when we say religion. The term has become a pox on all to whom it is placed. I know why atheists don't want it used to describe them. It is the same reason many good hearted church folk reject the term these days.

NostroZ:Keizer_Ghidorah: Religion prevents people from cynically sitting back and making fun of anyone who has a different idea? God told his followers to go out and either convert or kill those tho refused to convert.

Yes!!!Religion tempers people to listen to others.Here's some quotes from a book you only seem to know the parts that you disagree with:

James 1:19 Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger;Proverbs 19:27 Cease to hear instruction, my son, and you will stray from the words of knowledge.Proverbs 12:15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but a wise man listens to advice.Proverbs 18:13 If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame.Proverbs 11:14 Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety.Proverbs 10:19 When words are many, transgression is not lacking, but whoever restrains his lips is prudent.

NostroZ:Inflatable Rhetoric: Yea, MAN has created terrible diseases, such as malaria, polio, the plague, ebola, diphtheria, etc, etc. A MERCIFUL GOD would never do that. Right?

I fear that stylistic rhetoric has obfuscated this discussion.

When I said history has shown us that MAN is less MERCIFUL than GOD, I meant the rule of men without religion versus rule with religion. As with the case of atheist governments as was the case with USSR and China. To some degree, the Mongols did not have a religion either, they were tolerant of their conquered people's religion... yet, what do you know about the Mongols... Ghangis Khan, a leader who's policy of conquest was complete and utter destruction.

My point is that religion tempers the human heart and keeps it from doing greater evil.

My point is that you're mistaken about that.

You're point seemed to be that GOD was more MERCIFUL than MAN. Now your point is something else.

Agent Smiths Laugh:But when faced with that, do we even need gods to judge and/or guide our actions? Name one perceptible act of good or evil that a human being can accomplish that can not be accomplished without the divine.

I feel we are at an impasse of this discussion as it hinges upon the definition of the divine.

Personally, I feel that love is a divine gift that brings us closer to one another and the great-beyond.I also feel that creativity, whether it be in science, arts, or what have you, has the inspiration sparks of the divine.

Yet, I know you will have great issue with those statements, as what I described is imperceptible and is in fact intangible.Only the actions that we take as a result of that love, the selfless acts of love, are the perceptible aspects.The same goes for creativity. While it is a thought, it cannot be measured. Even before we have the full thought, an inspiration enters our mind yet we cannot trace the roots of it. This is divine nature in my humble opinion.

God is not a static being that watches and judges me as I see it.God is a verb... it is all around us and the better we tap into what 'walking in the path of God' the better human beings we are.

NostroZ:give me doughnuts: what I do know is that nothing I do in life will have any effect on whether or not there is any "afterlife", or what form it will take.

I am envious of your certainty.

I have a hard time believing that billions of people on this planet are wrong and I am right. Since every religion is based on a soul that is affected by this life's events, you are in a VERY minority view. But I respect your life's choice and hopefully when the day comes to both of us, then we will know who is RIGHT for sure.

I'd rather hedge my bets and be a good person, as proscribed by all the faiths of the world.

If I may ask a hypothetical questions then...You come upon a burning building and there is a young girl trapped inside. You are the only one around who can help. Do you help the girl inside and why?

I would attempt it. I've saved dozens, maybe 100's of lives, at the risk of my own.As to why, it's how I am.

liam76:So yes it does matter that we don't because it lets us know who not to waste tiem with when they do.

You and a few others have initiated this conversation about the meaning of the word religion. I was talking to someone else who was talking about sports fandom.

They didn't like the definition I was using either, nor that I was using it, nor that it was a legitimate definition. I have established that it is.

If the same part of the brain is at play in either scenario(sports/church), and you don't believe there even is a god, then there is no difference in reality, apart from rules and manners. If you believe there is a god to separate the two, then we are having quite an interesting conversation, indeed.

liam76:If I was saying "every part" that would be odd. Death penalty for gay peopel isn't a copntraversial topic in the muslim world.

Take a look at page 14 http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/ShariaLawOrOneLawForAll.pdf">http://www .civitas.org.uk/pdf/ShariaLawOrOneLawForAll.pdf

Even in 1st world countries dislike for gays is widespread among muslims.

"Dislike for gays" is not synonymous with "Support the death penalty against gay people".

liam76:What two countries are we talking about? There are numerous Muslim countries where the penalty is death, and there are numerous countries where you will get jail time and can be lynched for being gay. You are pointing to one christian country that contemplated a law including death penalty and saying they (all non western christiand countries) are on par.

In this case I was comparing Iran to Uganda, where the numbers certainly are on par. There are other places in Africa where things are even worse, though the discussion is complicated by poor record-keeping.

cman:propasaurus: That's fascinating. Do tell me how much you Christians love Islam.

The writer of the article is atheist

This is an atheist biatching about bigotry

Hmm, no. It's not bigotry to hate a religion. It's bigotry to hate the people who follow a religion, but it's not bigotry to hate a religion. "I hate Islam" isn't the same thing as "I hate Muslims."

/atheist//Don't hate ANY religions, just don't think they're for me.///I kinda privately mock neo-Pagans because that shiat's stupid and there's no excuse for choosing stupid, but I still don't hate them

Rabbitgod:even if it means killing other humans living under different God, and you might be actively working against the true God and ensuring a place in hell.

Though shall not kill is a pretty universal commandment.

I do not care what you CALL God... I only care that you walk in the path of God.

/To walk in the path of God is to abstain from stealing (property, life, truth, etc.) and to bring greater harmony / understanding upon this world.//I believe that there are many paths to the same God///Morality, the golden rule... is pretty universal... a good deed is a good deed, regardless of which god is being praised while doing it.

NostroZ:Keizer_Ghidorah: Religion prevents people from cynically sitting back and making fun of anyone who has a different idea? God told his followers to go out and either convert or kill those tho refused to convert.

Yes!!!Religion tempers people to listen to others.Here's some quotes from a book you only seem to know the parts that you disagree with:

James 1:19 Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger;Proverbs 19:27 Cease to hear instruction, my son, and you will stray from the words of knowledge.Proverbs 12:15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but a wise man listens to advice.Proverbs 18:13 If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame.Proverbs 11:14 Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety.Proverbs 10:19 When words are many, transgression is not lacking, but whoever restrains his lips is prudent.

Two can play that game:

1 Timothy 6:20 - O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:1 Corinthians 14:38 - But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.Timothy 2:11 - "I permit no woman to teach or have authority over men; she is to keep silent."Colossians 2:8 - Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

NostroZ:Agent Smiths Laugh: But when faced with that, do we even need gods to judge and/or guide our actions? Name one perceptible act of good or evil that a human being can accomplish that can not be accomplished without the divine.

I feel we are at an impasse of this discussion as it hinges upon the definition of the divine.

Personally, I feel that love is a divine gift that brings us closer to one another and the great-beyond.I also feel that creativity, whether it be in science, arts, or what have you, has the inspiration sparks of the divine.

Yet, I know you will have great issue with those statements, as what I described is imperceptible and is in fact intangible.Only the actions that we take as a result of that love, the selfless acts of love, are the perceptible aspects.The same goes for creativity. While it is a thought, it cannot be measured. Even before we have the full thought, an inspiration enters our mind yet we cannot trace the roots of it. This is divine nature in my humble opinion.

God is not a static being that watches and judges me as I see it.God is a verb... it is all around us and the better we tap into what 'walking in the path of God' the better human beings we are.

That's very poetic, but I deal in reality.

I still challenge you, name one perceptible act of good or evil that a human being can accomplish that can not be accomplished without the divine. Without poetry, without sentiment. Without your feelings or emotions. Quantifiable evidence only.

Is there any one action of humanity that does requires something more than our own action and responsibility?

maddogdelta:NostroZ: I'm not being ironic... but in truth, I see that believing is a better bet than not

Which god? if you get that one wrong, it's just as bad as not believing.

Part b) How much of a dick would your god have to be if he would let you go to heaven just by saying "you know, I had no evidence to believe anything, but I decided to say that I believed in you hoping that you would be fooled into thinking I was a true believer and not send me to hell"

God: "Sounds good, go into heaven"Ghandi :" I tried to do good things and free people."God: "Did you believe the way the Catholic Church told you to believe?"Ghandi: "No, I was a Hindu"God: "Hi ho, hi ho, it's off to hell you go!"

NostroZ:Rabbitgod: even if it means killing other humans living under different God, and you might be actively working against the true God and ensuring a place in hell.

Though shall not kill is a pretty universal commandment.

I do not care what you CALL God... I only care that you walk in the path of God.

/To walk in the path of God is to abstain from stealing (property, life, truth, etc.) and to bring greater harmony / understanding upon this world.//I believe that there are many paths to the same God///Morality, the golden rule... is pretty universal... a good deed is a good deed, regardless of which god is being praised while doing it.

Do you think people have to have a religion, believe in a god, to be concerned about the plight of other people?

Agent Smiths Laugh:1 Timothy 6:20 - O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:1 Corinthians 14:38 - But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.Timothy 2:11 - "I permit no woman to teach or have authority over men; she is to keep silent."Colossians 2:8 - Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

To name a few.

That's New Testament... I'm old school.Regardless, my point was that religion is a force for good overall.Yes, the Holy Roman empire used Catholicism as a tool of control... but the Roman's were a controlling power hungry bunch to begin with. If it was not Christianity that they took on, since it was the last vestige of control over a crumbling empire, it would have been any other saving grace.

The argument here is that the EGG came before the CHICKEN.Humanity's ego-maniacal desire for power came first. Religion as a social construct came after and tempered the first.

Agent Smiths Laugh:I still challenge you, name one perceptible act of good or evil that a human being can accomplish that can not be accomplished without the divine. Without poetry, without sentiment. Without your feelings or emotions. Quantifiable evidence only.

You ask me to define the human experience without naming any of the things that make us human.

NostroZ:Agent Smiths Laugh: But when faced with that, do we even need gods to judge and/or guide our actions? Name one perceptible act of good or evil that a human being can accomplish that can not be accomplished without the divine.

I feel we are at an impasse of this discussion as it hinges upon the definition of the divine.

Personally, I feel that love is a divine gift that brings us closer to one another and the great-beyond.I also feel that creativity, whether it be in science, arts, or what have you, has the inspiration sparks of the divine.

Yet, I know you will have great issue with those statements, as what I described is imperceptible and is in fact intangible.Only the actions that we take as a result of that love, the selfless acts of love, are the perceptible aspects.The same goes for creativity. While it is a thought, it cannot be measured. Even before we have the full thought, an inspiration enters our mind yet we cannot trace the roots of it. This is divine nature in my humble opinion.

God is not a static being that watches and judges me as I see it.God is a verb... it is all around us and the better we tap into what 'walking in the path of God' the better human beings we are.

NostroZ:Keizer_Ghidorah: Religion prevents people from cynically sitting back and making fun of anyone who has a different idea? God told his followers to go out and either convert or kill those tho refused to convert.

Yes!!!Religion tempers people to listen to others.Here's some quotes from a book you only seem to know the parts that you disagree with:

James 1:19 Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger;Proverbs 19:27 Cease to hear instruction, my son, and you will stray from the words of knowledge.Proverbs 12:15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but a wise man listens to advice.Proverbs 18:13 If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame.Proverbs 11:14 Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety.Proverbs 10:19 When words are many, transgression is not lacking, but whoever restrains his lips is prudent.

Now if only more Christians would actually FOLLOW what their God says.

HindiDiscoMonster:Agent Smiths Laugh: Besides which, your steps do nothing to refute the point of his statement. A serial rapist murderer could follow your steps (earnestly, "with all his heart", since that seems to be some important measurement) and still be forgiven of all his crimes (or sins as some call them) and earn an eternal paradise. While his victim, who for the sake of argument never accepted Jesus (or followed any of your steps), burns in eternal agony for unbelief.

Deeds do not make someone worthy to enter the kingdom of God as is quite clear in the Bible.

So the murder-rapist not only ultimately gets away with his crimes, but is actively forgiven for all of them and rewarded with eternal bliss, while his victim (whose last moments were of violation, humiliation, pain, and terror) remains unforgiven, and dies only to be punished with eternal violation, humiliation, pain, and terror.

yup, you can view it that way - see my response to the first issue.

How very just and fair of your god.

I know you meant that sarcastically, however, what makes you (a human who is imperfect) believe that you are qualified to judge God (who is perfect - according to the Bible)? [serious question]

But you might argue, "They had a chance for the same forgiveness!" Sure. Sure they did. Right up until they were raped and murdered by your happy new cherub.

Nope, I wouldn't.

Also, as an aside, so who's correct? The denominations that think water baptism is necessary or the ones who don't? What about the multitudes of other denominations that think steps are added or removed from your list? Are they right? What about other religions, are they right?

In order to understand who is correct in any religion (Christianity included), one must find the examples laid forth by the religion's primary prophet/messiah/etc... In other words, was Jesus baptized (in water), or not, etc.

Since the Bible was written long after the fact by people who never met God or Jesus, everything in it is assuming things about God and Jesus. Therefore Christians are just as guilty at presuming God's will and nature. Maybe the true nature of God is the Islamic one. It doesn't matter in the end, no sane and rational person would follow a being who deliberately makes a mistake and then curses all of the creation he created out of love to punish two humans and all of their descendants for the crime of becoming intelligent.

The Bible also contradicts itself numerous times. It's hard to follow something that can't even agree with itself.

s2s2s2:give me doughnuts: So your version of Christianity doesn't include the Old Testament?When did that change happen?

LOL. That may be a sad reflection on your knowledge of the subject, paired with your willingness to boldly speak thereon, but it is hilarious either way

If the Old Testament no longer applies, why do so many Christians use it to justify their bigotry towards gays?

NostroZ:Rabbitgod: even if it means killing other humans living under different God, and you might be actively working against the true God and ensuring a place in hell.

Though shall not kill is a pretty universal commandment.

I do not care what you CALL God... I only care that you walk in the path of God.

/To walk in the path of God is to abstain from stealing (property, life, truth, etc.) and to bring greater harmony / understanding upon this world.//I believe that there are many paths to the same God///Morality, the golden rule... is pretty universal... a good deed is a good deed, regardless of which god is being praised while doing it.

God ordered his followers to convert people or kill them and take their lands and belongings if they do not convert.

NostroZ:Agent Smiths Laugh: 1 Timothy 6:20 - O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:1 Corinthians 14:38 - But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.Timothy 2:11 - "I permit no woman to teach or have authority over men; she is to keep silent."Colossians 2:8 - Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

To name a few.

That's New Testament... I'm old school.

I.e you cherry-pick, something you blamed others of. I very much doubt that there aren't scriptures, both old and new testament, that you subscribe to. I find it statistically unlikely that you don't adhere to what you like from both.

However, it's holistically irrelevant. They are still scripture from your bible encouraging ignorance and rejection of other ideas.

Regardless, my point was that religion is a force for good overall.Yes, the Holy Roman empire used Catholicism as a tool of control... but the Roman's were a controlling power hungry bunch to begin with. If it was not Christianity that they took on, since it was the last vestige of control over a crumbling empire, it would have been any other saving grace.

The argument here is that the EGG came before the CHICKEN.Humanity's ego-maniacal desire for power came first. Religion as a social construct came after and tempered the first.

And also empowered it. Or were the crusades and the Spanish inquisition devoid of human ego-mania? Perhaps you overlooked Torquemada.

Hitler? Gott mit uns. And if you doubt for a moment that he invoked god to justify his ideology, you've not seen several of his key speeches.

But yes, human lust for power has always been. We are a competitive species. It's a problem for us. Stalin tried to stamp out religion to protect his power. A polar opposite of Hitler with the same results, cruelty and genocide.

NostroZ:Agent Smiths Laugh: I still challenge you, name one perceptible act of good or evil that a human being can accomplish that can not be accomplished without the divine. Without poetry, without sentiment. Without your feelings or emotions. Quantifiable evidence only.

You ask me to define the human experience without naming any of the things that make us human.

No, I asked you for empirical evidence of human actions requiring divine involvement.

NostroZ:Regardless, my point was that religion is a force for good overall.

Bull. It's a force multiplier for the police. Most people will live in fear and minimize the bad things they would normally do because they don't want to go to hell. However, those it doesn't work on will still be horrible humans, or worse, use religion as a weapon itself. The thing is that you don't need God to do any of the positive things. You need a life code, and the billions of Buddhists in the world don't necessarily have a deity they worship, but come out in good shape. Hell, I would say they come out in vastly better shape as humans than Christians, Muslims, Hindus, or Jews. Except it didn't work in Japan too well. They just adapted it and still were murdering butchers in the Imperial era. Oh well.